70-200 or 100-400 lens?

[GSPhoto]

I'm debating if I should get the 70-200mm F/2.8L IS or the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM. I would get the faster 70-200 if i go with that, but i don't know if the extra 200mm is going to be needed. I do take a lot of nature and sunsets, but should I go with the 70-200 and go with the 300mm 4.0L later.

[Stephen Probert]

I don't know about the extra 200mm, but if you are doing nature shots and sunset, then you might want to consider the 70-200 f/4 IS lens. The lens is SO sharp, even at f/4, sharper than the f/2.8 judging by Bryan's ISO crops, and the IS is newer giving an extra stop of hand-holdability (making the hand-holdability of the two lenses equal). Given that the subjects you intend to shoot are not moving (animal subjects excluded) and you may need to carry your equipment a distance to get to your shots, you might appreciate the reduced weight (50%) of the f/4 compared to the f/2.8 since you don't need the action-stopping f/2.8.


Good luck.

[Bryan Carnathan]

If you are shooting birds and other animals, it seems that you never have enough focal length - the 100-400 would be my choice. 400mm can really bring a sunset in nicely as well.


As Stephen mentioned, the 70-200 f/4 L IS is a great lens. It is relatively small and makes a great landscape lens.


The 70-200 f/2.8 L IS is also a great lens. I use it much more frequently for people and sports - especially in low light situations. It can stop action in 1/2 as much light as the f/4 versions can.

[Tony Printezis]

Bryan and Stephen covered most of what I wanted to say! Also, don't forget that you'd be able to use the 1.4x extender on the 70-200 (either version) to get some extra reach when you need it.


Tony

[EdN]

I have the 70-200 IS F4 L and I'm quite pleased with it. It's compact, light weight, and has excellent IQ. I also debated purchasing the 100-400 L but declined for two reasons. I did not like the push-pull zoom and a lot of user reviews comment on softness at the long end wide open. What I did instead was to purchase the 300 F4 L which had rave reviews for sharpness and image qualities. This is what I principally use for wildlife and bird photography. The focus is also quite fast. I also purchased the 1.4X extender over the 2.0X extender because most reviews say there is no image quality loss. It works with both the 70-200 IS F4 and 300 F4 L. For wildlife stuff, the 1.4 is mounted on the 300 F4 L most of the time.

[Tom Alicoate]

For me 200mm isn't enough for most wildlife outside of a zoo. The 70-200 is much more versatile for everyday, and the f4 version is small enough to not attract too much attention at an indoor event. Push pull isn't such a big deal for the 100-400, it works well, just takes a little getting used to. I have the 70-200f4 for everyday stuff, and I rent the 100-400 when I go out west for wildlife photography. Of course the 100-400 is not 2.8, and with animals out early morning and late night, I am always looking for something which is faster. I would suggest IS, I miss having it on my 70-200.


Tom

[greggf]

I think that I would go with 70-200 f4 IS if I were you. It is a fantastic lens, focuses extremely fast, is sharp wide open, and has a 4 stop IS...hard to beat combination. Here is a sunset just taken with 5D Mark ll and said lens( iso 200, 70mm, 5.6 at 1/125).[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.00/Aptos-Sunset_2D00_0449-_5B00_800x600_5D00_.jpg[/img]

[EdN]

Wow! That's a really nice shot!

[Fabricio]

I think the 70-200 is a better lens. I think is one of those lenses that one will use in every ocation. I think the 100-400 is the cheapest way o get a 400mm lens. I will get the 100-400 when I need that range.

[bob williams]

I do own a 100-400 and find that it is on my camera more than any other lens. Its crisp and clear---especially if tripod mounted--- and yields great landscape/sunset/sunrise colors. Like Brian says, it seems like you never have enough reach when shooting animals. It is heavy and has the slide zoom which takes getting used too. But its well worth it. Like you, I like the idea of a faster lens, so for me the 70-200L 2.8 IS is next on my list.